Tim Walz ordered thousands of soldiers to occupy my city. There were armored men with guns and armored military vehicles everywhere. He did this to protect a murdercop.
Tim Walz ordered thousands of soldiers to occupy my city. There were armored men with guns and armored military vehicles everywhere. He did this to protect a murdercop.
I've tried and tried and tried to hammer this in to Libs; It wasn't Trump who sent the US Army in to my city to crush democratic organizing and political unrest, to protect a white cop and uphold white supremacy, to hold the population at gunpoint while the deeply corrupt and illegitimate judiciary did it's thing.
It was Tim Walz.
He deployed thousands of US Army soldiers throughout Minneapolis in the days surrounding the reading of the verdict of one of the George Floyd murder cases. If the judiciary let that cop walk free he was going to maintain order no matter how many (black) people he had to murder to do it. I was trying to reassure my friends that the feds probably hadn't issued ammunition to all the National Guard pukes marching through the streets, that the armored cars didn't actually have machine guns fitted, but idk what the fuck they would have done if people had risen up in the aftermath if what's his ass had been allowed to walk. I assume they brought in a military occupation because they intended to use it.
You're viewing a single thread.
I'm confused. Why was the judiciary deeply corrupt and illegitimate? It wasn't the judge that determined guilt, it was a jury. Derek Chauvin was charged and found guilty and is currently in prison. I hear complaints about the national guard being in our cities, but that is the authority the state has and they are correct to use it when there is risk to public safety from civil unrest.
You're confused because when people say "scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds" they're talking about you
Ha I'm so far left you get your guns back. Go bleat at someone else, troll.
I hear complaints about the national guard being in our cities, but that is the authority the state has and they are correct to use it when there is risk to public safety from civil unrest.
You're so far left that you can't help but deepthroat the state and defend its monopoly on the use of force to "keep public safety from civil unrest" despite the actual meaning of that being "protect the neoliberal status quo"
You are a liberal dawg, absolute shitlib, in desperate need of political education
Oof, ya got me. Your memes cut me to the core.
Go bleat at someone else, troll.
Considering your account has twelve posts worth of history and like ten of them are removed I fuckin doubt that one doll. Especially when YOUR modlog is full of rank, egregious copsuckery.
Wrong. The national guard should have been deployed against the cops to protect us from the biggest white power gang in the US.
It is possible to do that, but to my knowledge it's only happened once
Warned about the size of the force Bowers was raising, Governor Davis Hanson Waite interceded again in the strike. He issued a proclamation on May 27 in which he called on the miners to disband their encampment on Bull Hill. In a development unparalleled in American labor history, he also declared the force of 1,200 deputies to be illegal and ordered the group disbanded. He also ordered the state militia to be on the alert for a possible move on Cripple Creek. On May 28, the governor visited the miners, who authorized Waite to negotiate on their behalf.
Well, this would have been a good 2nd time to do it.
Oh, I agree completely. I meant to emphasize that your option hasn't always been unthinkable in this country, even if we know no governor in 2020 ever had that thought.
Permanently Deleted
The next Cripple Creek strike scared the mineowners so much they invalidated the 1904 gubernatorial election:
Peabody ran for a second term in 1904, but was vilified by his opponents, who declared "Anybody but Peabody!" and felt that he was in league with the mine owners. Peabody's opponent, Democrat Alva Adams, ripped into his handling of the Cripple Creek strike and insisted that he could handle Colorado's vicious "industrial warfare." After the election, it appeared Adams had won, but Republicans, who still controlled the state legislature, insisted that significant fraud and corruption had conspired to steal the election from Peabody (in reality, both sides had committed major violations of election law). On the day that Adams took office (March 17, 1905), the Republican-controlled legislature voted to remove him from office and reinstall Peabody, on the condition that Peabody immediately resign. He did so,[1] and at day's end it was Peabody's lieutenant governor, Jesse McDonald, who occupied the governor's mansion in Denver – thus making Colorado the only state to have three different governors (Adams, Peabody, McDonald) on the same day.
So we should have them constantly deployed to protect us from police? Talk about hyperbole, holy shit.
Nah fam I'm not engaging with this shit, disingenuously twisting someone's words is a low level bait trap you can't catch me in.
Get the fuck out of this instance, lib. Imagine having a ".ml" next to your name and saying all the pro-cop shit you've been saying here.
Whew, it's been awhile since someone's accused me of being pro-police or a lib. Pretty hilarious. Stay stuck in your reactionary worldview I guess.
He's in prison because there was an uprising. They were prepared to let him walk. That's the default when a cop kills someone. That's what happened in Chauvin's previous brutality cases. The judiciary was corrupt in the way that all of them are, because the footsoldiers of the law aren't subject to that law.
Can you demonstrate that? Do you know that for a fact? No you can't and you don't. Your assumptions aren't reality.
Chauvin was not arrested until May 29. Protesters burned down the Minneapolis third police precinct on May 28.
Chauvin had a history of violent behavior, George Floyd wasn't even the first person whose neck he'd kneeled on. None of the incidents resulted in any real punishment.
The "threat to public safety" is and always has been from the cops.
I'm not saying that's not the case, but there is also a threat from people in crowds. Or was Kyle Rittenhouse a cop, too?
I mean, he was literally in communication with the cops and they gave him carte blanche to open carry an AR into a crowded area, so, basically, yeah
Wisconsin is an open carry state to begin with. It's not like they were giving permission. Unless you count the online "deputizing" bullshit that got spread around. I've also never seen evidence that he was in communication with police. Is there actually evidence of that? I know there is evidence of the police purposely pushing protesters towards each other.
And that's separate from the legality of him having an AR before legally being able to buy one, or transporting it across state lines.
A wannabe cop, close enough.
In addition to the great points made by everyone. I think its important to add
I'm sure Mao is proud of how much your memes advance the cause.
”That's the authority the state has” isn't an argument in favor of anything.
It is an argument in favor of the way the laws are, which affect all of us. The fuck are you on about? You can talk about what's wrong with the law but you can't say it's not the law.
It sounds like you're arguing that it's okay to do things because it's the law.
I literally said "you can talk about what's wrong with the law" but go off.
blindly supporting the authority of the state without regard for what that authority is used for is what makes you a shitlib and not remotely left
it's like this other dickless Lemmy lib the other day who talked about working on satellite image recognition software that could track ships everywhere in the ocean. What would it be used for? they didn't care, they were just Working on the Science. They then mentioned "it could be used to save refugee ships!" but the actual reality is that the most likely organizations to make use of this technology are all the fucking governments who want to keep those refugees out. You know, the ones who put people on trial for saving victims of capsized ships? christ. literally werner von braun level of "I'm just doing the science"
anyway, it's good when the state organizes violence on behalf of the working class, but that doesn't happen in states where that authority is directed by the bourgeoisie, the violence is always directed to uphold that authority, and just fucking ignoring that is shitlib, proto-fascist, dumbfuckery at its most charitable description
The jury are one part of the process, but the judiciary has many levers to affect the outcome. For example, they can bar certain evidence from the court.
As for calling the national guard: Derek Chauvin is guilty, we all fucking saw what he did. The entire thing is on camera. A court cannot change reality. If the court had found him innocent, that would have been a miscarriage of justice against the people of this country. When we exhaust peaceful avenues, when a court fails to convict an obviously guilty man who murdered one of us in cold blood on camera, the only other way to defend ourselves from the same thing happening again is to fight back, to use the last remaining tool we have: ourselves, our power in numbers, the one thing they cannot take away from us.
You're the white moderate MLK decried in his letter from a Birmingham jail, the fucking sadsack who prefers an empty peace, the absence of conflict, rather than the presence of justice. You don't give a shit about police violence. It will never affect you. What you are is a fucking fascist who should never show your face in public again.
Except he was found guilty. You're being incredibly hyperbolic here. What may have happened and what actually happened are two different things. You're seriously searching for things to be mad about instead of being mad at the things that are actually going wrong.
The national guard was called in anticipation of what might have happened. Obviously. And had it happened, the national guard would have been wrong to stop it. You would have cheered for them, though. Right? Otherwise, why the fuck would you waste your time writing these comments?
No, I was marching in the streets. You really can't see any other perspectives, can you?
THEN WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU DEFENDING TIM WALZ FOR CALLING THE NATIONAL GUARD ON YOU
Because the national guard didn't do shit to me or anyone else. It was the fucking cops. Holy shit how is that all lost in this? There were issues with NG in other states, but here in MN they were overall ok. I wouldn't call them jackbooted thugs, as opposed to the riot police who were fucking TERRIBLE.
mods sometimes y'all just gotta leave stuff so that people can see how dumb libs are
Seriously, I'm logging on after a long day and don't see shit.
iirc he said some shit about how "how was the judiciary corrupt, blah blah blah they convicted chauvin!!" and then casually defended the right of the state to mobilize the national guard to potentially massacre protesters if he was found not guilty. Not like they thought that was GOOD but like "well it's the state's right!" without a single thought afterwards of what defending that in this context means.
it was shit libbery but like idk if we're gonna be federated or whatever and these dipshit libs are gonna come around, mods shouldn't just be removing shit for shit-libbery because it removes the whole context of these arguments where we're dunking on them. It's not like anything this comment said was some like bigoted cognitohazard yknow
I agree, I don't get the point of federation if typical brainworm shit is always removed. We miss out on a lot, it doesn't have much substance but still. I understand things that reach a certain threshold of violence, or threats, or racism/misogyny/etc., but just kinda defeats the entire point when they get removed just because they're dumb.
If it were up to me, we'd even be federated with lemmy.world but whatever. I think Hexbear will end up probably end up totally defederated someday, and I don't know if I'll stick around at that point. Maybe but won't be as good.
